Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All things being equal, i think Bo Jackson deserves some consideration in the argument.
So if your asking me, I think its a push. Thorpe would be the greatest of the 1st half of the 20th Century and Bo would be the greatest in the 2nd half..
He certainly does deserve some consideration. Every time I think of Bo Jackson I think of an individual who could have been a perennial all star baseball player or a football player if he would have just settled in on one sport. I actually remember seeing that Bengal/Raider game where lb Kevin Walker brought down Bo Jackson on a tackle. To tackle him one on one in the open field was almost an all pro play right there. After the play I remember him standing up but not moving. And the socket was pulled out of his hip! But the guy was tough as nails as he went off the sideline. He later had to have hip replacement surgery and sadly his NFL career afterwards was done.
I also remember reading the quote from Sports Illustrated by Brian Bosworth after a November Monday Night Football Seahawks/Raiders game. Quote Bosworth: "He just flat ran my a*s over." Jackson, who was asked by his teammates what he said to the Boz after he bowled over him for 6, replied "Next time pay bus fare!" GREAT!
As far as the argument goes who was better at baseball, actually looking at the stats on Baseball Reference (a very good site BTW), Thorpe finished with a .252 batting average and Jackson finished at .250. Thorpe played 7 seasons and Jackson 8, I believe.
In Thorpe's era, he simply had no peer. With Jackson, I can think of other athletes with awesome ability. As much as I don't care for Prime Time, give Deon Sanders his do as he's another 2 sport guy. Deon also finished in the top 50 in the NFL Networks "Top 100 players in NFL history." Baseball wise he was like Bo- good, not a superstar though. Another guy would be Darrel Green who could still run the 100 at age 40, and played defensive back for the Redskins for a couple seasons afterwards. Not a two sport guy but an incredible athlete.
Keeping in mind that even though Bo only played 1 more baseball season, he actually played in more than double the amount of games (baseball).. A larger sample size for sure. Thorpe actually hit .327 his final baseball season which skewed stats a little, but you could also argue, he was getting better and had figured out how to hit.
Bo played both sports at the same time.. ie. same season.. Thorpe ended his baseball career when his NFL career started..
Still, i think its a push.. both were good baseball players and HOF football players, except for Bo's football and baseball career were cut short due to injury and therefore he is not in the HOF like Thorpe is.
If you take the Gold Medals in the Olympics that Thorpe won, which were taken away, I think you would have to put him over Bo in an All Time listing!
Deion definitely deserves honorable mention.. he was a good baseball player and HOF football player. Isn't it odd how the 3 most recognizable two sport stars (baseball/football) were all HOF football players and just good baseball players.. ?!
I don't think you can pick a single person as the greatest ever.
You could easily pick out a lot of different athletes from different generations.
Bo Jackson to me is the best ever during my life time. Played multiple sports and played them well. If he did not have injury, he could have had a hall of fame career in both baseball and football.
You could also base your thoughts on domination. In which case Secretariat would have to be in the conversation.
I think Bo was a HOF caliber football player but not so much of a HOF baseball player. I also think that even without injury, he probably doesn't make either. There are many HOF caliber players not in the hall for various reasons.. I think Bo would have been hurt by his part time status in football. He never played a full season and it seemed apparent that he wasn't going to change that.. the most games he played in the NFL in one season was 11. He would of had a hard time putting up the stats needed to garner enough votes to get in the hall. He surely would have gotten some votes but some writers would not have voted for him because of his part time status.
On the baseball side, he simply never put up the numbers needed. He had decent power but never hit more than 32 HRs in one season and his lifetime batting average was .250 and he never hit over .279 in a single season. He just wasn't a HOF baseball player at any time during his career and never would have been.
The Highlight of Bo's baseball career was the homerun he hit in the All Star game.. other than that, i don't remember much other than him breaking a bat over his knee after a strike out.
No athlete who specializes in one sport can be put in the conversation. I would argue guys like Bruce Jenner, or anyone who has won a decathalon on a world stage is probably a better all around athlete then a one sport guy.
Then you have to go to two sport types, such as Bo Jackson, Brian Jordan or Deion Sanders.
Then finally you get down to the one sport guys, and you also picked a tennis player, I would place just about anybody in any of the four major US sports, as well as soccer, probably professional cycling and track, in front of a tennis player as an overall athlete.
I think Bo was a HOF caliber football player but not so much of a HOF baseball player. I also think that even without injury, he probably doesn't make either. There are many HOF caliber players not in the hall for various reasons.. I think Bo would have been hurt by his part time status in football. He never played a full season and it seemed apparent that he wasn't going to change that.. the most games he played in the NFL in one season was 11. He would of had a hard time putting up the stats needed to garner enough votes to get in the hall. He surely would have gotten some votes but some writers would not have voted for him because of his part time status.
In addition, Jackson wasnt even the primary guy carrying the ball.
In 1987, Jackson got 11.5 carries a game
In 1988, Jackson got 13.6 carries a game
In 1989, even with Marcus Allen out half the season, he still only got 15.7 carries a game
In 1990, Jackson didnt start a single game, and fell to 12.5 carries a game
He was gone by 1991
If you compare to other guys, such as Walter Payton (20.2 carries a game) or Barry Sanders (20.27 carries a game), Jackson would have practically needed to have a career as long as his Raidermate, Marcus Allen (16 years), to have put up enough numbers to even be considered.
Jordan deserves some consideration being the GOAT of basketball. Added to that Basketball is one of the most athletically challenging sports today IMO.. I think if he had never attempted to play baseball you could put him higher on the list but the mere fact that he tried, and failed for the most part hurts his credentials...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
